I agree, Rodgers usually chooses his words carefully so I was surprised when he came out and said what he said. I don't know how similar the testing is for the NFL and MLB so that would have been the only thing Rodgers could speak on.

There's some testing, but it's not nearly as thorough and, frankly, I would be stunned, STUNNED, if the number of current NFL players on some sort of PED is anything less than 100%; just in football, nobody really cares. You're going to tell me a guy who tears his ACL in December comes back the very next year and rushes for 2,000+ yards? Come on. Those guys are all doping.

There's some testing, but it's not nearly as thorough and, frankly, I would be stunned, STUNNED, if the number of current NFL players on some sort of PED is anything less than 100%; just in football, nobody really cares. You're going to tell me a guy who tears his ACL in December comes back the very next year and rushes for 2,000+ yards? Come on. Those guys are all doping.

Yup. Baseball seems to be only of the 4 major American sports that takes testing seriously.

This is like putting a small 4 inch speed bump on a NASCAR track....this will never end, may as well let em drug and let the game evolve

And what happens twenty years from now when retired players come forward about the side-effects incurred by PED use? The I have a problem with the use of PEDs has nothing to do with the idea of having a level playing field in Major League Baseball, as there is no such thing. My primary complaint against the use of any supplementation is that the side-effects of long-term use cannot be predicted: are players willing to risk the remainder of their lives for the sake of prolonging their careers by four or five years? I don't know that I'd be willing to take that risk, but baseball needs to consider both the short- and long-term ramifications of allowing PEDs to become such a problem.

Now, guess the four MLB franchises that have four players on those two lists:

1. Mariners
2. Mets
3. Yankees
4. Padres

You can do your own research to figure out the names of the six franchises with three players.

When I look at these lists of players I think, these guys were all caught red-handed and they are going to get punished for it, and well they have earned that punishment.

Then I look at the list of teams with the number of suspended players for each. I wonder if the teams with no suspended players have just been lucky to have had no PED users on the team, or, maybe, they actively assess players for risk of PED use and steer away from them.

And then I look at the list of four teams with four suspended players and wonder if they are just unlucky, or maybe they are willing to accept the risk that some of their roster may be PED users. After all, the franchises aren't sanctioned by the league if a player or two or three or four or eight ends up suspended for PED use. Sure they lose a player to suspension, but thats a competitive limit rather than a true financial sanction on the franchise.

There is no way that PED use will be diminished by sanctions on the players alone.

There's some testing, but it's not nearly as thorough and, frankly, I would be stunned, STUNNED, if the number of current NFL players on some sort of PED is anything less than 100%; just in football, nobody really cares. You're going to tell me a guy who tears his ACL in December comes back the very next year and rushes for 2,000+ yards? Come on. Those guys are all doping.

Now, guess the four MLB franchises that have four players on those two lists:

1. Mariners
2. Mets
3. Yankees
4. Padres

You can do your own research to figure out the names of the six franchises with three players.

When I look at these lists of players I think, these guys were all caught red-handed and they are going to get punished for it, and well they have earned that punishment.

Then I look at the list of teams with the number of suspended players for each. I wonder if the teams with no suspended players have just been lucky to have had no PED users on the team, or, maybe, they actively assess players for risk of PED use and steer away from them.

And then I look at the list of four teams with four suspended players and wonder if they are just unlucky, or maybe they are willing to accept the risk that some of their roster may be PED users. After all, the franchises aren't sanctioned by the league if a player or two or three or four or eight ends up suspended for PED use. Sure they lose a player to suspension, but thats a competitive limit rather than a true financial sanction on the franchise.

There is no way that PED use will be diminished by sanctions on the players alone.

The Sox willingly traded for Tyler Flowers after he was already busted for juicing with the Braves organization so you can forget thinking that they actively assess players for PED use and steer clear. I think it is much more about who got caught than certain teams cheating any more or less than any other team.

In fact, if you take a look at the list of minor league guys busted every organization on your list goes away.